Vegetation

[Bassmeister]

So Beaver is my local lake. And I know there are quality bass in it but they are few and far between. And frankly, any bass over 5-6 is a real giant. Sure, there are 5-10 guys locally that have it figured out. But that does not make it even a decent bass fishery. My question, with so much dead water, why hasn’t any vegetation (ie hydrilla) been planted? There are a number of large areas throughout the lake that would support it. And locally (Quillback you know what I’m talking about) the introduction has exploded bass populations. Do people just not care that much about having a quality bass fishery or do they not know how to manage it? I know it’s not that simple but bigger forces must be at play I’m unaware of...

[Ham]

Lake levels very so Greatly in Beaver, TR, and Bull Shoals that vegetation like coon tail and hydrilla are not likely to get much of a foothold. Drawing down lakes is a method of vegetation control. Just guessing I would say Bull varies 20 foot in surface level on average with some years being MUCH more than 20 foot. 

I enjoy fishing lakes with vegetation, but we have to look elsewhere for that. 

[Bassmeister]

2 hours ago, Ham said:

Lake levels very so Greatly in Beaver, TR, and Bull Shoals that vegetation like coon tail and hydrilla are not likely to get much of a foothold. Drawing down lakes is a method of vegetation control. Just guessing I would say Bull varies 20 foot in surface level on average with some years being MUCH more than 20 foot. 

I enjoy fishing lakes with vegetation, but we have to look elsewhere for that. 

Agree Bull has massive fluctuation. Beaver and TR don’t seem quite as bad. I’d just think there is SOMETHING that would grow and really help. Would just really like it to be better than it is. Just don’t feel like anyone cares to make it better for bass.

[Quillback]

There is some hydrilla in Beaver not too far from the Lost Bridge South ramp, I noticed it there a couple of years ago.  It doesn't appear to have spread at all in the time that it has been there.  Maybe like Ham says, water fluctuation keeps it under control.

Loch Lomond, here in Bella Vista, has in about 5 years become completely infested with hydrilla, used to be none at all, and the bass population has exploded in that lake.  However, the POA also manages the hydrilla, they have a mower to keep it a few feet below the surface in the shallow coves and they do some spraying around docks and boat lanes so you won't see it matting up on top like it will in lakes where it is unmanaged.

If you want to do some reading on the subject, search 'Lake Ouchita hydrilla'.  I used Google, you can get varying results based on the search engine you use.

Here's somthing I copied out of one of the articles.

Hydrilla, a highly invasive exotic weed, is present at water deeps of 5 to 30 feet is a succulent rhizome type weed that cannot be controlled by lowering the lake. The explosive growth of this weed overpowers other aquatic vegetation. Essentially, density of its growth creates an environment that harbors smaller forage fish but precludes larger game fish from feeding. This creates a non-supportive environment causing the size and numbers of popular game fish to decline.

[Ham]

11 minutes ago, Quillback said:

 

Hydrilla, a highly invasive exotic weed, is present at water deeps of 5 to 30 feet is a succulent rhizome type weed that cannot be controlled by lowering the lake. The explosive growth of this weed overpowers other aquatic vegetation. Essentially, density of its growth creates an environment that harbors smaller forage fish but precludes larger game fish from feeding. This creates a non-supportive environment causing the size and numbers of popular game fish to decline.

Let me preface this by saying Small Samole Size error most likely BUT

IME, hydrilla did not hurt larger fish numbers. Maybe it would if it took over the lake totally, but with the water depths we have, Nope.

you might not be able to eliminate hydrilla with normal amounts of water fluctuations, but you certainly can control it. If you drop the lake 5 foot over the winter and a hard freeze  occurs (we get a couple of those a year) all the exposed hydrilla dies and you get an inside edge (I love fishing that) AND if you put > 30 FOW on top of it, hydrilla dies back. Bull often sees Plus 20 above the old 654 number. So, if we ever got enough stability for hydrilla to get established, I still think it would be limited to a thinner band of water with a clean inside edge at 8 foot or and an outside edge at 15 FOW. Then we would have a 690 year and kill all of it. 

[MOPanfisher]

 I seriously doubt any state agncy will be planting th invasive Hydrilla, in MO it is being very actively hunted down and eradicated.  Small amounts of it make fishing great, unfortunately Hydrilla is an invasive.  Many lakes in MO have tried several times to plant various types of aquatics, but the fluctuating lake levels kill it off.  Extended high water seems to be worse and more common than low water years.

[sfiser]

You also have to think of the bottom composition in a lot of these lakes.  If you don’t have some sort of dirt bottom, no grass will grow.  Bottom of beaver is very rocky and has ledges/bluffs, not ideal grass habitat.    Beaver is a quality lake, it’s just stingy and hard to crack.  

[MoCarp]

We have a 25 acre city lake that got hydrila for those that knew fishing was great, some huge readears big bass, the local tackle shop sales crashed casual anglers couldn’t bobber and crawler fish, pressure to do something about the weeds and the ducks Who’s poop was blamed

families fed ducks and geese for decades on a lazy weekend...once the weeds were sprayed fishing was good then crashed...too much harvest always equals sub standard fishing...lake never has been right since...

I guess where I’m going with this is simple...more bass meet a fillet knife than people know, getting caught and stressed out from getting hauled all over isn’t good ether....want bigger better bass fishing? Lower pressure, lower harvest by the tools in managements tool box....might even mean parts of lakes here no fishing is allowed or limit numbers of anglers, pay walls like boat permits, or days of use limits...we can all agree we have waaaaay to many tourneys, perhaps a pricy tournament tag....nothing will be popular.

even tourneys changed, how many bass can you catch? Personally I’d like a tourney that no fish under say 18” counts....quality over quantity.....

[Bassmeister]

7 hours ago, sfiser said:

You also have to think of the bottom composition in a lot of these lakes.  If you don’t have some sort of dirt bottom, no grass will grow.  Bottom of beaver is very rocky and has ledges/bluffs, not ideal grass habitat.    Beaver is a quality lake, it’s just stingy and hard to crack.  

There are a lot of big flats, especially in the river section that have mud bottom. It would grow. We have a different definition for quality bass lake. It can be good at times. If the stars align. And again I know some offshore guys do well. I don’t think becoming a local expert and catching em makes for a quality lake though. 

[Bassmeister]

On 10/28/2020 at 5:56 AM, Quillback said:

There is some hydrilla in Beaver not too far from the Lost Bridge South ramp, I noticed it there a couple of years ago.  It doesn't appear to have spread at all in the time that it has been there.  Maybe like Ham says, water fluctuation keeps it under control.

Loch Lomond, here in Bella Vista, has in about 5 years become completely infested with hydrilla, used to be none at all, and the bass population has exploded in that lake.  However, the POA also manages the hydrilla, they have a mower to keep it a few feet below the surface in the shallow coves and they do some spraying around docks and boat lanes so you won't see it matting up on top like it will in lakes where it is unmanaged.

If you want to do some reading on the subject, search 'Lake Ouchita hydrilla'.  I used Google, you can get varying results based on the search engine you use.

Here's somthing I copied out of one of the articles.

Hydrilla, a highly invasive exotic weed, is present at water deeps of 5 to 30 feet is a succulent rhizome type weed that cannot be controlled by lowering the lake. The explosive growth of this weed overpowers other aquatic vegetation. Essentially, density of its growth creates an environment that harbors smaller forage fish but precludes larger game fish from feeding. This creates a non-supportive environment causing the size and numbers of popular game fish to decline.

Thanks sir, I did see that article before. And frankly, that’s what got me thinking. So much of beaver is not in the depth of growth. A fair amount is rock and prob wouldn’t support it well.  But there is a decent amount of “dead water” in big flats with mud bottoms that would do well. I think it has a lot of potential with the clear end and mid lake for spots and smallmouth.  But the river section could be A LOT better for habitat and could really hold a huge largemouth population. Maybe it’s just my frustration coming out but I do think there’s a lot of improvement that could happen to make a much more diverse lake with opportunities for offshore and shallow fishing